If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

At no point in time during the playoffs did I ever think to myself, man if only we had a better backup center we could take these guys.

Really? That was all I could think about. How the bench Center and PF sux so bad. How they constantly would throw a lead away. How I didn't want to see Lou and Hans out there on the floor. They was terrible to the point of embarrassing. Other then being wowed by Lebron, and wishing Barabosa would show up, this was very much one of the biggest / only things I thought about.

.

Frank Vogel says "Killer instinct, start strong, build a lead and then step on their throats."

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

I think most will agree with you. The biggest problem wasn't and isn't that our bench isn't good enough, but it is that our best players 1 through 3 are not good enough.

But our bench needed an upgrade and that is much easier to do than to acquire players better than West, Roy and Granger. Only way IMO we could have acquired a player better than our best three is to take a huge chance on a player hoping they might turn out to be a better player than any of those three guys. Williams or Howard weren't coming here and neither was Nash. So we would have had to gamble, trade one of our best players for a potential player.

That is usually a bad strategy. I think this is the correct approach, improve where we can, grow as a team, hope that Paul George becomes our best player and that chemistry and stability pull us through.

This is not unlike the Pacers from 1994 - 2000. The team from 2002 - 2005 tried the other approach, gamble on some questionable guys and most of you didn't appreciate that approach.

But overall no, we won't beat the Heat in 2013 if both teams are as they are now. But I'd love to see us in the ECF with the Heat next late May to have that chance.

Pacers need to take the Dallas Mavs approach. Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture and win it all like the Mavs did in 2011. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top like Tyson Chandler did for the Mavs

I think UB hits on the head here. We know the Pacers are maybe a piece or two away, as far as I can tell TPTB looked around saw that the piece wasn't out there this offseason and so they decided to re-shuffle the deck on the bench and keep our starting 5 (which was one of the best units in the playoffs last year) and then come back to the drawing board next summer. Maybe we catch lightning in the bottle next spring and take down Miami, yes, it's a long shot, but it's not impossible.

Our bench may not be markedly better talent wise, but we added two key things, backup size and more athleticism. Miles and Green both makes us more athletic off the bench. Mahinmi gives us size that we just absolutely did not have, no offense to Fez, he is hilarious and I hope we bring him back as a 15th man just for his tweets, but Mahinmi is actually competent, we did not have a big competent player off the bench last season. Hans and Lou were two guys with similar skill sets doing a whole lot of nothing for large portions of their time on the court. And we added that backup size and athleticism while keeping our biggest asset off the bench, yes his name is not Darren Collison, but DJ Augustin is just about as close to a carbon copy of Collison as you could get and you could argue that he is a better creator than DC.

So yeah we didn't get Eric Gordon and OJ Mayo and sign Steve Nash, but we had a pretty respectable offseason. Are we a markedly more talented team? Probably not, but do I think we are a little better put together? Yes, and I think we have a higher ceiling than we did on Wednesday before any of this went down.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

The Pacers kept the starting lineup the same. They then completely overhauled their bench removing all that was negative (except Tyler) and adding positives at nearly every position. How that can't be seen as a gain is beyond me.

Except you can't think of it that way. Pacers are a small market team. They need to take advantage of all assets. This is something the Pacers have missed out on since Antonio Davis. The brawl didn't help anything, but they've been selling low on players for a long time now. Not to mention wasteful draft picks. The long term outlook of this team is not looking good.

-How do you not try to get at least a pick for DC? A pick could be helpful in the future. Didn't have to be a pick next year, but maybe 2 or 3 years out.
-On top of that, you sign Augustin for more money than what you were paying DC. He's smaller (so he's going to have trouble feeding the post), and he's a horrid shooter but better passer. I don't consider this an upgrade at all. I would say lateral, but the guy is making more than DC. I don't get this at all.
-Tyler is a bust and was the wrong pick when the Pacers needed a point and passed on 2 points that could have solved our problems in Lawson/Holiday. This hurts the longevity of the team, cause he's a wasted pick, and now they'll have to search for 2 PFs next year to replace West & Hans. Possibly having to use a 2013 pick on another big man that won't be ready for awhile.
-Plumlee was equally dumb. He's not even ready, so the Pacer's brass had to make another trade for a big man. If you take someone that's not ready, go for Moultrie/PJIII/Teague who all have way more upside.

Just blows my mind on the shortsightedness of the front office right now.

Gerald Green was a very nice pickup, but it's a high risk/high reward. I like these types of moves. Our starting 5 is set, so I would hope the Pacers make some bold moves for the bench.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

Augustin is making more than DC next year, however DC's cap hold next offseason was going to start at 6.7 million like the article says. I think a lot of are being pretty hard on Augustin to say he's not a better scorer than DC. Collison has a huge problem of just not being aggressive at times, yes he did it in the playoffs, but I need to see it consistently out of him, and I am a guy that absolutely loved DC. Augustin we do not need to worry about that with, he will look for his shot and to create with that second unit.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

As I had posted before the trade, Mahimni was / is the best backup option available. I am stoked for this deal. There is no doubt that the Mavs wasn't going to resign him. If we didn't offer what we did. He would be resign by Dallas. FA doesn't mean anything when a Player knows his team wants to resign him and the player would like to be resigned. This trade allowed the Pacers to get the guy they wanted without over paying, He has a very long manageable contract where Hibbert and Mahimni can continue to grow.

Also, on a side note, I think Plumlee will be a pleasant surprise to many of you. To have 7'2' Hibbert, 6'11" Mahimni, and 7' Plumlee for the next 4 years will be a real force. I can only hope they all stay healthy.

Last edited by Pacer Fan; 07-13-2012 at 09:56 AM.
Reason: typo

.

Frank Vogel says "Killer instinct, start strong, build a lead and then step on their throats."

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

Augustin is making more than DC next year, however DC's cap hold next offseason was going to start at 6.7 million like the article says. I think a lot of are being pretty hard on Augustin to say he's not a better scorer than DC. Collison has a huge problem of just not being aggressive at times, yes he did it in the playoffs, but I need to see it consistently out of him, and I am a guy that absolutely loved DC. Augustin we do not need to worry about that with, he will look for his shot and to create with that second unit.

it's 5.7, or am i missing something. 250% of current salary.
i don't think it really matters for us (it matters for Dallas), we are very unlikely to have cap space summer. D-West would have to go. We will use exceptions.

but the key here is our ability to keep them all. it's not DC vs. DJ. unless we are misinformed about the salaries of all these new players, we could've had them all without this trade.
from asset point of view, it's better to have DC than not to have DC.

I think they wanted the cap to add another player (besides the ones we added).
Maybe they wanted to get rid of Dahntay but noone bit. So they packaged him with DC, feeling that the cap space/that mysterious player would be a better asset for this team.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

Pacers need to take the Dallas Mavs approach. Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture and win it all like the Mavs did in 2011. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top like Tyson Chandler did for the Mavs

I have always agreed with that approach. You put the best team, not necessarily starting lineup, in the court for 48 minutes that you are capable of manning. You stay in the upper echelon for as long as you possibly can and hope that is what will buy you opportunities for a championship through getting to the ECF as many times as you can.

Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

As I had posted before the trade, Mahimni was / is the best backup option available. I am stoked for this deal. There is no doubt that the Mavs wasn't going to resign him. If we didn't offer what we did. He would be resign by Dallas.

the Mavs didn't seem interested in a long term deal with Mahinmi. Mahinmi said so himself. They were focused on Kaman and other short term deals.
Who knows, you may be right, but the general perception / signs were different.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

I know its a business and emotions shouldn't be involved, but is it out of question that the FO wanted to do right by DC after getting demoted to backup and signing Hill to a big contract? It kind of goes along the lines of why we don't chase RFA, we conduct business like "gentlemen".

From what Pritchard said on Twitter and thanking DC and Dahntay for their service here, I believe this to be the case. Why not move DC to a place where he can start and earn his next contract? He probably wasn't going to get that opportunity here next year.

"Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

"And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "
Want your own "Just Say No to Kamen" from @mkroeger pic? http://twitpic.com/a3hmca

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

Pacers need to take the Dallas Mavs approach. Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture and win it all like the Mavs did in 2011. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top like Tyson Chandler did for the Mavs

You mean the Dallas approach of expending a bunch of money until winning a championship? the also have Dirk, we don't have anything close to that.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

You mean the Dallas approach of expending a bunch of money until winning a championship? the also have Dirk, we don't have anything close to that.

Yep. People called the Mavs the underdog, feel good team last year only because they were playing the hated Lebron and co.

The reality is that Cuban spent untold millions in luxury tax money, constantly taking on high priced contracts year after year. He'd make a trade that took in several pieces of overpriced junk from other teams in order to get 1 valued piece. He did this for 10 years and it eventually culminated in a team with the right pieces at the right time.

The Mavs and Knicks of the past decade were the closest things the NBA had to a franchise that spent money like the Yankees.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

You mean the Dallas approach of expending a bunch of money until winning a championship? the also have Dirk, we don't have anything close to that.

No, I mean the Mavs approach as in: Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture and win it all like the Mavs did in 2011. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top like Tyson Chandler did for the Mavs.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

Yep I remember that Jkidd trade, Cuban ended up signing a guy that was already retired to make the trade happen, if I'm not mistaken he paid 7mil to that guy just to be part of the trade.

Yep, he signed Keith Van Horn (who was retired at the time) to a huge 1 year contract just to be part of a trade to make it work. Keith Van Horn got paid millions to do nothing but put his name in a trade. Literally.

But that's not even the tip of the iceberg.

He once took on Tariq Abdul Wahad's obscene contract in order to get his hands on Raef Lafrentz, who he then gave a $70M extension to. And not only did he just amnesty the final 3 or 4 years of Haywood's contract, but in the previous CBA he amnestied the last 3 years and $51M of Michael Finley's deal. And there's even more examples of this type of obscene spending.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

A big part of the Mavs' being that good for that long was having a superstar to go along with an owner who was more than willing to spend deep into luxury tax territory year after year.

EDIT: Just to add, I would love having Mark Cuban as my team's owner.

OK, OK, don't do it like the mavs. Do it like this. Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top

My approach is the same. If the Mavs part is tripping you up, OK don't do it like the mavs.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

No, I mean the Mavs approach as in: Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture and win it all like the Mavs did in 2011. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top like Tyson Chandler did for the Mavs.

Not the other stuff you guys are talking about. Don't be difficult.

I got two words for you, Dirk Nowitzki, tinker the Pacers all you want but we still don't have a difference maker.

Also "tinkering the Dallas way" is way different than 'tinkering the Pacers way", the "Dallas way" requires expending a lot of money and going over the cap and the "Pacers way" requires to stay under the cap and get a bench player here and there.

Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

I got two words for you, Dirk Nowitzki, tinker the Pacers all you want but we still don't have a difference maker.

Also "tinkering the Dallas way" is way different than 'tinkering the Pacers way", the "Dallas way" requires expending a lot of money and going over the cap and the "Pacers way" requires to stay under the cap and get a bench player here and there.

The Pacers way has had very little to do with being under the cap. 2 years out of 20.